The Defense Security Service (DSS) plays a critical role in national security. Understanding its workforce demographics and Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) practices is crucial for ensuring fairness and effectiveness within this important agency. This report analyzes the DSS workforce composition and EEO complaint processing data for Fiscal Year 2009, providing insights into the agency’s diversity and its handling of employee concerns.
Workforce Demographics of the Defense Security Service in FY 2009
In FY 2009, the Defense Security Service maintained a total workforce of 721 employees, with 707 permanent and 14 temporary positions. A detailed breakdown reveals the demographic composition of the permanent workforce:
| Total # | Men | Women | Hispanic or Latino | White | Black or African American | Asian | Native Hawaiian / Other Pacific Islander | American Indian / Alaska Native | Two or More Races | Individuals with Targeted Disabilities | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Permanent Workforce | 707 | 58.84% | 41.16% | 3.11% | 76.80% | 15.42% | 2.12% | 0.28% | 0.71% | 1.56% | 0.85% |
, while 41.16% were women. Ethnically, White employees constituted the largest group (76.80%), followed by Black or African American employees (15.42%). Hispanic or Latino employees represented 3.11% of the workforce. Other groups, including Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Two or More Races, collectively comprised a smaller percentage of the DSS permanent workforce.
Diversity within Major Occupations
Analyzing major occupations within the Defense Security Service reveals further insights. Security Administration, the largest occupation group with 415 employees, showed a slightly higher percentage of women compared to the overall permanent workforce. However, Information Technology Management roles were predominantly male (74.47%).
In terms of ethnicity and race within these occupations, the data largely mirrors the overall workforce composition, with White employees representing the majority in both Security Administration (76.14%) and Information Technology Management (78.72%).
Representation in Leadership Roles
Leadership positions within the Defense Security Service, categorized as GS-14/15, Senior Pay Level, and Officials/Managers, demonstrate varying levels of diversity. Senior-Level Officials/Managers showed the highest percentage of male representation (79.17%). Notably, First-Level Officials/Managers, while a small sample size (1 employee), were 100% Asian women, suggesting potential diversity in entry-level management.
Targeted Disabilities Employment at the Defense Security Service
The report also examines the employment of individuals with targeted disabilities (IWTD) within the Defense Security Service. As of September 30, 2009, DSS employed 6 IWTD, representing 0.83% of the workforce. This figure fell short of the federal goal of 2% participation. To meet this goal, DSS would have needed to employ 14 IWTD. The report indicates that DSS’s IWTD employment remained stagnant compared to FY 2008 and had decreased slightly since FY 2005, highlighting a need for focused efforts to improve recruitment and inclusion of individuals with targeted disabilities within the agency.
EEO Complaint Processing at the Defense Security Service in FY 2009
Effective EEO complaint processing is vital for ensuring a fair and equitable workplace. The report details various aspects of EEO complaint processing within the Defense Security Service during FY 2009.
Timeliness and Counseling
The Defense Security Service demonstrated efficiency in pre-complaint counseling, timely processing 100% of the 7 pre-complaint counselings completed in FY 2009. This indicates a commitment to addressing employee concerns promptly at the initial stages.
Bases of Complaints
The most frequently cited bases for alleged discrimination in complaints filed at the Defense Security Service were:
- Race (Black/African American)
- Age
- Sex (Female)
Out of the 6 complaints filed, half involved allegations of race discrimination (Black/African American), and one complaint included an allegation of disability discrimination.
Complaint Processing Times and Efficiency
While pre-complaint counseling was timely, complaint investigation timelines presented a challenge. Only 60% of the 5 completed investigations were considered timely. The average time for DSS to complete an investigation was 182 days, significantly higher than the lowest average of 100 days among agencies completing 25 or more investigations, which was achieved by the Tennessee Valley Authority.
Furthermore, the average processing time for all complaint closures at the Defense Security Service significantly increased from 453 days in FY 2008 to 1,015 days in FY 2009. This was considerably higher than the government-wide average of 344 days, indicating a potential area for improvement in the efficiency of the DSS EEO complaint processing system.
| Total # | # Timely | % Timely | FY 2008 APD | FY 2009 APD | % Change | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All Pre-Complaint Counselings (minus remands) | 7 | 7 | 100% | |||
| All Investigations | 5 | 3 | 60% | 0 | 182 | NA% |
| All Complaint Closures | 1 | 453 | 1,015 | 124.1% | ||
| Merit Decisions (no AJ) | 0 | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0 | NA% |
| Dismissal Decisions (no AJ) | 1 | 0 | 1,015 | NA% |
 | 7 | 7 | 100% |
| All Investigations | 5 | 3 | 60% | 0 | 182 | NA% |
| All Complaint Closures | 1 | 453 | 1,015 | 124.1% |
| Merit Decisions (no AJ) | 0 | 0 | 0% | 0 | 0 | NA% |
| Dismissal Decisions (no AJ) | 1 | 0 | 1,015 | NA% |
Costs and Outcomes
In FY 2009, the Defense Security Service reported no monetary benefits paid for pre-complaint settlements. The agency expended a total of $24,978 for 5 complaint investigations, averaging $4,996 per investigation. There were no complaint closures through settlement agreements or final agency decisions fully implementing an AJ decision in FY 2009. The single complaint closure was a dismissal decision.
Conclusion
The FY 2009 data for the Defense Security Service provides a snapshot of its workforce composition and EEO complaint processing. While the agency demonstrated strengths in timely pre-complaint counseling, there were areas identified for potential improvement. These include increasing representation of individuals with targeted disabilities and enhancing the efficiency of EEO complaint investigation and overall processing times. Addressing these areas can further strengthen the Defense Security Service’s commitment to a diverse, equitable, and high-performing workforce, essential for its critical national security mission.
